Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Dave Kilroy]

Can anyone explain what the situation would be with open source, LiveCode 
server and revigniter? 

I sure I don't understand something basic about how open source works - I think 
I get it in terms of distributed software, but what about code that lives on a 
server?

If I currently create a web app for a client using LiveCode server then I can 
keep the code files private - and that's good. But what about the following 
situations?

Scenario A: If in the future if I create a web app under a professional licence 
from RunRev then I guess I can still keep code I write private - but do I need 
to keep my licence current with RunRev in order to do so? Or if I let the 
licence lapse at some time in the future do I then need to make it public? 

Scenario B: If in the future I create a web app using LC server and want to do 
it under the free licence - do I really have to let everyone see the code that 
runs the website?

Also, what about revigniter, is it the same as with LC server or do any special 
conditions apply?

In all of the above scenarios there will be lots of things in the code on the 
server that I would want to keep private.

I hate this legal stuff - what am I missing and can someone explain how it can 
be open source whilst still being secure?

Kind regards

Dave


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Kevin Miller]

Scenario A: your license lapsing does not alter software you have already
distributed. It prevents you from editing/updating your software and then
posting an update, until you renew that is.

Scenario B: No, you don't have to release code to people who simply
interact with your website. There is an alternative open source license
called AGPL which would have required that, we chose not to adopt this
license.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
LiveCode: Unleash Your Killer App




On 03/02/2013 11:47, "Dave Kilroy"  wrote:

>Can anyone explain what the situation would be with open source, LiveCode
>server and revigniter?
>
>I sure I don't understand something basic about how open source works - I
>think I get it in terms of distributed software, but what about code that
>lives on a server?
>
>If I currently create a web app for a client using LiveCode server then I
>can keep the code files private - and that's good. But what about the
>following situations?
>
>Scenario A: If in the future if I create a web app under a professional
>licence from RunRev then I guess I can still keep code I write private -
>but do I need to keep my licence current with RunRev in order to do so?
>Or if I let the licence lapse at some time in the future do I then need
>to make it public?
>
>Scenario B: If in the future I create a web app using LC server and want
>to do it under the free licence - do I really have to let everyone see
>the code that runs the website?
>
>Also, what about revigniter, is it the same as with LC server or do any
>special conditions apply?
>
>In all of the above scenarios there will be lots of things in the code on
>the server that I would want to keep private.
>
>I hate this legal stuff - what am I missing and can someone explain how
>it can be open source whilst still being secure?
>
>Kind regards
>
>Dave
>
>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Monte Goulding]

Unless you are distributing you web app code with LC Server then it won't be 
under GPL as far as I know. Just like using MySQL for your server db.

On 03/02/2013, at 10:47 PM, Dave Kilroy  wrote:

> Can anyone explain what the situation would be with open source, LiveCode 
> server and revigniter? 
> 
> I sure I don't understand something basic about how open source works - I 
> think I get it in terms of distributed software, but what about code that 
> lives on a server?
> 
> If I currently create a web app for a client using LiveCode server then I can 
> keep the code files private - and that's good. But what about the following 
> situations?
> 
> Scenario A: If in the future if I create a web app under a professional 
> licence from RunRev then I guess I can still keep code I write private - but 
> do I need to keep my licence current with RunRev in order to do so? Or if I 
> let the licence lapse at some time in the future do I then need to make it 
> public? 
> 
> Scenario B: If in the future I create a web app using LC server and want to 
> do it under the free licence - do I really have to let everyone see the code 
> that runs the website?
> 
> Also, what about revigniter, is it the same as with LC server or do any 
> special conditions apply?
> 
> In all of the above scenarios there will be lots of things in the code on the 
> server that I would want to keep private.
> 
> I hate this legal stuff - what am I missing and can someone explain how it 
> can be open source whilst still being secure?
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

--
Monte Goulding

M E R Goulding - software development services
mergExt - There's an external for that!





___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Dave Kilroy2]

Thanks for the replies Kevin & Monte

>From what you've both written it appears there will be no difference from
the current situation if we use LC server (and possibly also using
revigniter) to make a website in the future - Yay!

(please let me know if this is not correct)

Kind regards

Dave



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-LC-server-and-revigniter-tp4660146p4660156.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[David Bovill]

Not quite true the
GPLv3includes the
"
affero " clause
- this is designed to include the more modern concept of web apps. That is
hosting a publicly available web service using GPLv3 licences code is
considered equivalent to physically distributing the code and therefore you
must release any other code linked to your service under the amse GPLv3
license.

On 3 February 2013 11:50, Monte Goulding wrote:

> Unless you are distributing you web app code with LC Server then it won't
> be under GPL as far as I know. Just like using MySQL for your server db.
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Kevin Miller]

We're not using the AGPL. It is optional and we're not using it.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
LiveCode: Unleash Your Killer App




On 04/02/2013 12:44, "David Bovill"  wrote:

>Not quite true the
>GPLv3includes the
>"
>affero "
>clause
>- this is designed to include the more modern concept of web apps. That is
>hosting a publicly available web service using GPLv3 licences code is
>considered equivalent to physically distributing the code and therefore
>you
>must release any other code linked to your service under the amse GPLv3
>license.
>
>On 3 February 2013 11:50, Monte Goulding
>wrote:
>
>>Unless you are distributing you web app code with LC Server then it won't
>>be under GPL as far as I know. Just like using MySQL for your server db.
>>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[David Bovill]

Ah good to know - my bad. Doesn't immediately strike me as in your
interests - though I can see some companies demanding this - still why you
don't simply require them to pay up for a commercial license on the server
like seems at odds with the overall strategy, and less likely to promote
open code on the server side?


On 4 February 2013 12:50, Kevin Miller  wrote:

> We're not using the AGPL. It is optional and we're not using it.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Kevin
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Dave Kilroy2]

Yes I agree, I don't see how RunRev will get any reward for having a server
version - and if they don't get any reward for it then it may be less likely
to be developed on an on-going basis.

I use TextMate to write code and upload to a server (whether I use
revigniter or not) - I'm not building a standalone or even uploading a stack
- so as far as I can see it will make no difference whether I use the
commercial or GPL version.

If I create and upload some stacks I guess I'll still be OK with the GPL
version as I'm not building a standalone?

If I build a standalone and upload that only then will need a commercial
licence (unless I also make source code available) 

Or maybe RunRev are happy to have the server version as a loss-leader?

Dave



Ah good to know - my bad. Doesn't immediately strike me as in your
interests - though I can see some companies demanding this - still why you
don't simply require them to pay up for a commercial license on the server
like seems at odds with the overall strategy, and less likely to promote
open code on the server side?




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-LC-server-and-revigniter-tp4660146p4660180.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Richard Gaskin]

Dave Kilroy2 wrote:

Yes I agree, I don't see how RunRev will get any reward for having a server
version - and if they don't get any reward for it then it may be less likely
to be developed on an on-going basis.


When you think about it, LiveCode Server isn't much different from the 
main engine:  the merge function is extended and implicit, and the GUI 
handling is turned off automatically so you don't need to pass "-ui" to it.


With the if-defs they use to compile it already set up, I can't imagine 
it's much work to maintain it going forward.




Or maybe RunRev are happy to have the server version as a loss-leader?


Yes.

The AGPL was created for one fairly recent project, Affero (the "A" in 
"AGPL") in 2007.


It's useful if that's what you need, but it's one of the least commonly 
used licenses around, often considered too strict for most projects. 
I'd be surprised if as many as a dozen other projects have adopted it 
thus far.


Meanwhile, MySQL has flourished under GPL.  Most of us use it for free, 
but when you need to bundle your app with it then you get to have a 
conversation with Oracle's licensing department; same with LiveCode Server.


LiveCode is nearly unmatched for making multi-platform GUI apps, but 
LiveCode server doesn't have nearly the competitive advantages over 
readily-available alternatives.


PHP, for example, has a vast community, uncountable libraries, books, 
and tutorials available, and is already both multi-threaded and 64-bit 
compatible.  Moreover, PHP is available for free under the very 
permissive PHP License, and is pre-installed on most commercial hosting 
systems.


LiveCode's syntax has some nice conveniences, but for serious work its 
main benefit is for those who need to share code used also in 
LiveCode-based GUI apps, or to rely on coding skills acquired from using 
LiveCode in GUIs.


As a for-fee product, LiveCode Server is a hard sell.  But available for 
free use under GPL, it would at last have a chance to enchant newcomers 
with its unusually inviting syntax.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
 Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Kevin Miller]

This is it exactly. When selecting the license we looked very closely at
the competitive landscape. GPL will play nicely given our competitive
strengths as a desktop/mobile framework. But to do AGPL with the server
version would be a mistake. We have a bigger hill to climb there and so we
need to attract the framework writers etc who will really make that
platform sing. If that can happen its good for the platform/language as a
whole.

The server version now its done isn't so hard to maintain. It doesn't need
much added and where it does that tends to overlap with the other
versions. For example, it needs the ability to draw objects and take
snapshots of stacks but that's something that will be enabled by other
work happening on the graphics stuff as part of the platform rework for
non-server platforms anyway.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
LiveCode: Unleash Your Killer App




On 04/02/2013 17:17, "Richard Gaskin"  wrote:

>LiveCode is nearly unmatched for making multi-platform GUI apps, but
>LiveCode server doesn't have nearly the competitive advantages over
>readily-available alternatives.
>
>PHP, for example, has a vast community, uncountable libraries, books,
>and tutorials available, and is already both multi-threaded and 64-bit
>compatible.  Moreover, PHP is available for free under the very
>permissive PHP License, and is pre-installed on most commercial hosting
>systems.
>
>LiveCode's syntax has some nice conveniences, but for serious work its
>main benefit is for those who need to share code used also in
>LiveCode-based GUI apps, or to rely on coding skills acquired from using
>LiveCode in GUIs.
>
>As a for-fee product, LiveCode Server is a hard sell.  But available for
>free use under GPL, it would at last have a chance to enchant newcomers
>with its unusually inviting syntax.
>



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Dave Kilroy2]

Thanks all, I understand now :)


This is it exactly. 



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-LC-server-and-revigniter-tp4660146p4660194.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Richard Gaskin]

Kevin Miller wrote:

For example, it needs the ability to draw objects and take snapshots of
stacks but that's something that will be enabled by other work happening
on the graphics stuff as part of the platform rework for non-server
platforms anyway.


Wow.  So cool.  That'll obviate a lot of need for imagemagick, opening 
up many new doors for LC Server.


Will that be available next Tuesday?  :)

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
 Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Kevin Miller]

Depends how much you pledge :)

In all seriousness though, there is an ongoing project on this front which
is definitely getting there now.

Kind regards,

Kevin

Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
LiveCode: Unleash Your Killer App




On 04/02/2013 17:58, "Richard Gaskin"  wrote:

>Kevin Miller wrote:
>> For example, it needs the ability to draw objects and take snapshots of
>> stacks but that's something that will be enabled by other work happening
>> on the graphics stuff as part of the platform rework for non-server
>> platforms anyway.
>
>Wow.  So cool.  That'll obviate a lot of need for imagemagick, opening
>up many new doors for LC Server.
>
>Will that be available next Tuesday?  :)
>
>--
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World
>  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
>  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
>  Follow me on Twitter:  http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys
>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Dr. Hawkins]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Kevin Miller  wrote:
> This is it exactly. When selecting the license we looked very closely at
> the competitive landscape. GPL will play nicely given our competitive
> strengths as a desktop/mobile framework. But to do AGPL with the server
> version would be a mistake.

This still leaves the GPL 2/3 question.  And if you use 2, whether you
want to license as 2 only, or as "or any later version."


-- 
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[Robert Mann]

Hi fantastic news and bravo to the team... now one more question regarding LC
server :

Will LC server OS be able to open a protected stack like ZYGODACT which is
made to help authentification at sites or to sell softwares, and obviously,
that is protected...?

If not, will there be a commercial LC server version that can do that?

What I clearly understood is that , to make and update such a protected
stack one would require of course a commercial version. That is clear.

I think the answer will be :: bad luck, you can't use protected stack with
the OS version, full point. But nice to clarify that point, thanks!

On the ground of it, personnaly, I was going to contribute to revIgniter
with a simplified hierarchical database based on stacks on a OS basis to
accompany the move and as a thank you to Ralph Bitter for his wonderful
work, but I wonder whether in the case of protection algorythms, there might
be a case for not releasing the algorythm public.

This would mean that LC server OS could not be used for dealing with
transactions that require some degree of privacy and control, or that each
user has to code some specific identification mechanism, OS in theory, but
not visible since on the server... which is some sort of half backed
position.

Also sub question : does that mean that all encrypting functions will not be
available on the server OS version??? (because otherwise one can devise a
specific protection scheme and deliver on a client server the OS server plus
specifically protected stacks encrypted by a propriatary which would be
against the OS principles, but realistically feasible since residing on a
closed server environment )

Well food for thoughts!!







--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-LC-server-and-revigniter-tp4660146p4660263.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, LC server and revigniter

[J. Landman Gay]

On 2/6/13 1:17 PM, Robert Mann wrote:

Hi fantastic news and bravo to the team... now one more question regarding LC
server :

Will LC server OS be able to open a protected stack like ZYGODACT which is
made to help authentification at sites or to sell softwares, and obviously,
that is protected...?

If not, will there be a commercial LC server version that can do that?

What I clearly understood is that , to make and update such a protected
stack one would require of course a commercial version. That is clear.

I think the answer will be :: bad luck, you can't use protected stack with
the OS version, full point. But nice to clarify that point, thanks!

On the ground of it, personnaly, I was going to contribute to revIgniter
with a simplified hierarchical database based on stacks on a OS basis to
accompany the move and as a thank you to Ralph Bitter for his wonderful
work, but I wonder whether in the case of protection algorythms, there might
be a case for not releasing the algorythm public.


RR says they will not release the password protection algorithm. 
Commercial licenses will be able to use it, but it will not be in the 
open source version.


Since Zygodact requires password protection, it will be sold only to 
users who have a commercial license. Existing users won't be able to 
open their Zygodact stacks if they are using the free version. Apps 
built with the free version won't be able to display the Zygodact 
register dialog.


I don't know how LiveCode server will work, but I'm sure the free 
version won't include password protection, and it wont be able to open 
Zygodact password generators. Perhaps RR will release a commercial 
server that can do it. But if they don't, you can still use the CGI 
script and the older CGI engine.


Clarification on this would be good to hear from the team.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode